Climate Commission hubris may lead to nemesis for our economy

I am deeply suspicious of the Climate Commission Report. The Commission has been set an overtly political brief, but both it and it’s progenitor James Shaw seem to see it as unnecessary to actually justify their objectives, yet to achieve the objectives will, if they are proceeded with, require massive societal and economic change which I suspect few, if indeed any, really comprehend fully.

Therefore, I find the hubris exhibited by the Commission deeply troubling, for example see this very concerning post at Eric Crampton’s blog:

Blessed are they that have not seen the model, and yet have believed https://t.co/OKpMwynGn6

— Eric Crampton (@Offsetting) February 23, 2021

It would be useful to remember the modeling around Covid and how inaccurate that turned out to be.

I find the reason for non-disclosure highly suspect.

Then I came across this

It's just ridiculous. The Climate Commission refuses to open up its workings for anyone else to check. They publish tiny snippets, thwarting any ability to check their work and test its robustness.

Literally billions of dollars ride on it, plus our whole climate response.

— Eric Crampton (@EricCrampton) February 22, 2021

Working in Excel on anything important scares the bejezus out of me. What if I made an error in a formula somewhere? How could I tell? When I do it in Stata, I just set a .do file. I can see every step and every transformation of the data. And so can anyone else who reads Stata.

— Eric Crampton (@EricCrampton) February 22, 2021

Given the possible scale of change necessary, the manner in which the work is being undertaken strikes me as cavalier, but the attitude taken, means we cannot properly judge.

I am very concerned that the Ardern regime has apparently committed to implementing the report, in advance of receiving it.

What process is in place for review?

How can affected parties assess the validity of the findings if underlying data, etc is not released?

What is the competency of the Commission to perform this work?

What checks and balances are in place?

Will the report be peer reviewed, and if so who by?

How were the models developed, who were they developed by and what was/is the track record of the developers in formulating similar models?

Did the models, for example allow appropriately, for the impact of ceasing production here, and the impact of producing elsewhere?

I suspect the model is underpinned by some heroic assumptions and presumes that ‘she’ll be right’ – not a recipe for success, especially when there has been little effort to secure willing ‘buy in’ though there has been lip service to the concept and some PR from the regime’s media lackeys.

This suspicion is supported by the argument that in reality there will be little perceived cost.

Frankly I do not believe that claim.

We need complete openness and transparency now!